'Accepting Jesus into your heart' and Evangelical perspectives on baptism

[R. Schutt]

I'd like to get a little perspective on Orthodoxy's view of Evangelicals who say the "Sinner's Prayer" but never get baptized. In many Evangelical churches, Baptism is not viewed as a necessity per se, but rather an expectation that one will obey Christ's commands to baptize. Thus, if someone doesn't receive baptism in the Evangelical church, but has said the "Sinner's Prayer" it is deemed that they are saved (because it is the faith of the "Sinner's Prayer" that saves, not baptism, particularly since it is seen as a "work").

So is it possible that someone who puts their faith in Christ, via the "Sinner's Prayer" but never gets baptized is saved? Or is baptism so essential for salvation that one cannot be saved without baptism?

I guess I'm just trying to understand the importance of baptism in the Orthodox Church and its ecumenical implications.

[Herman Blaydoe]

I'd like to get a little perspective on Orthodoxy's view of Evangelicals who say the "Sinner's Prayer" but never get baptized. In many Evangelical churches, Baptism is not viewed as a necessity per se, but rather an expectation that one will obey Christ's commands to baptize. Thus, if someone doesn't receive baptism in the Evangelical church, but has said the "Sinner's Prayer" it is deemed that they are saved (because it is the faith of the "Sinner's Prayer" that saves, not baptism, particularly since it is seen as a "work").

So is it possible that someone who puts their faith in Christ, via the "Sinner's Prayer" but never gets baptized is saved? Or is baptism so essential for salvation that one cannot be saved without baptism?

I guess I'm just trying to understand the importance of baptism in the Orthodox Church and its ecumenical implications.

Salvation is not an event, it is a journey. Baptism is sort of the "official" beginning of that journey. It is the rite of initiation that marks you as a participating member of the continuing worshipping People of God. It is the symbol of death and resurrection that Christ took part in to identify with us, so that we, too, can take part in it to identify with Him.

Prayer is also a work. "Works" do not "save" us, but they help make us ready for salvation, that we might "run the course of the race" as the Apostle Paul tells us. An athlete does not say the runner's prayer and get to be called the winner of the race. He must run the race. So in that sense, neither a "sinner's prayer" nor baptism "saves" in and of themselves. God does the saving of course.

Can one be saved without baptism? I suppose but why deny yourself an opportunity for a blessing? Can you "fight the good fight" without armor and weapons? Can you "tough out" a sickness instead of taking the medicine (the sacraments) are there to heal you? I suppose, but why?

Baptism is the gateway to all the other sacraments, it is the first healing and admission into the spiritual hospital that is the Church.

[J. K. Amra]

Whatever Herman has said is true, and worded better than I could have worded. I would just like to add some quotes from various websites about Protestantism.

"Coming off a couple of decades of heightened awareness of our need for a personal knowledge of Christ—notably evidenced through such phenomena as the Jesus Movement and the charismatic re new al—most thinking Christians are realizing something else is needed: the rediscovery of the historic Church.

Often, in heated reaction to dated and dead Protestant liberalism, we would hear evangelical preachers in the late sixties and early seventies say, “All you need is Jesus!” Such statements often got rave reviews, but just a little thoughtful reflection quickly showed such a simplistic religion to be shallow and unfulfilling. More and more, that kind of existential reductionism is being tempered with a renewed emphasis on the whole impact of the Incarnation, the coming in the flesh of the Son of God. There must be more to Christianity than a private, internalized in di vi*dual ism. If all we needed was Jesus, why would Jesus have promised, “I will build My church” (Matthew 16:18)"

http://www.antiochian.org/node/16918

"The naive conception of one's own sinlessness and holiness, along with a failure to understand the essence of Christianity, has characterised Protestant denominations since the time of Martin Luther (the beginning of the 16th century). A prominent Protestant theologian summed up the Protestant understanding of Christianity thus: "The justification of a sinner is an all-embracing act of God. When a believer is justified, all his sins - past, present and future - are forgiven. The moment God pronounces him justified, the totality of his sins is pardoned" (William G. T. Shed, Dogmatic Theology, Grand Rapids: Zondervan 1888; emphasis added).

Apparently faith in Jesus Christ automatically guarantees a man, if not sinlessness, at least an absence of guilt for his sins. Such an opinion is not only radically wrong, but also very harmful, because it deprives man of the powerful means of regeneration which our Lord Jesus Christ gave to believers for their spiritual purification and sanctification."

http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/essence_christianity_2.htm


As for Baptism, What do you think Christ meant in Matthew 28:19-20 when he said
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you (the Apostles); and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

The only Church that observes all things that Christ commanded the Apostles to observe is the Orthodox Church.

[Olga]

Baptism is not viewed as a necessity per se, but rather an expectation that one will obey Christ's commands to baptize.

It seems to me odd and ironic that anyone of a tradition which calls itself "evangelical", and who is expected to obey Christ's commands in Matt. 28:19-20 would himself choose to remain unbaptised.

[Antonios]

John 3

1 There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”

3 Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

4 Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?”

5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”

10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? 11 Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

22 After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He remained with them and baptized*. 23 Now John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there. And they came and were baptized. 24 For John had not yet been thrown into prison.

25 Then there arose a dispute between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purification.

26 And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!” *

27 John answered and said, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven. 28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but, ‘I have been sent before Him.’ 29 He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is fulfilled. 30 He must increase, but I must decrease. 31 He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32 And what He has seen and heard, that He testifies; and no one receives His testimony. 33 He who has received His testimony has certified that God is true. 34 For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure. 35 The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. 36 He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


* John 4:2 (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples)


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Dear R. Schutt,

The above two sections of verse are among the greatest reasons why Christians undergo the mystery of baptism. Our Lord and Savior explicitly tells us that "he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." If He tells us we need to be born 'of water and the Spirit', and then proceeds to baptize people, I think we would all get in line. I can't imagine St. Nicodemus upon hearing this allowed even one more minute to go by before asking the Lord to go with him to the nearest body of water to be baptized.

Interestingly, notice above in John 3:22 that it is written that "He remained with them and baptized" and in John 3:25 it writes that a dispute arose between the the disciples of St. John the Forerunner and the Jews regarding purification.

Who are these Jews? And what was the dispute?

The next line of Scripture may provide the information: "And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all are coming to Him!”" (John 3:26)

My reading from this is that the Jews were those who went to Jesus rather than John to be baptized. They had found greater purification!

And so they crowded into rivers in order to be baptized.

It is telling that St. John adds in the next chapter that "Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples". Jesus was baptizing all of these faithful Jews by the hands of His disciples. Though Christ was present, it was his disciples, the future apostles, who were performing the mystery. This is how it was then and how it still is now.

In these formative years of the soon-to-be-born Church, we see the first glimpses of the Church established by Christ and maintained by the Holy Spirit. And the Church's glorious day of birth in this world was on the day of Pentecost. And on that very day, St. Peter stood amongst the crowd and said "repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38)

"Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls."(Acts 2:41)

Thus the Orthodox Church has always followed the instructions and example of Jesus (after all, He too was baptized in order 'to fulfill all righteousness)' as well as maintain the apostolic witness on the importance of baptism.

This being said, can someone be saved without undergoing baptism by water? Of course! In fact, the Church has methods when water is not available, such as using sand or dirt and even the air! We must never forget that there are no limits to God's love and mercy, a great example being the salvation of the thief on the cross. He lived a sinner's life, was dying a cursed way, and was unbaptized, though because of his tears of repentance, because of his baptism in tears, the Lord saved him.

In Christ,
Antonios

[R. Schutt]

Can one be saved without baptism? I suppose but why deny yourself an opportunity for a blessing? Can you "fight the good fight" without armor and weapons? Can you "tough out" a sickness instead of taking the medicine (the sacraments) are there to heal you? I suppose, but why?

So for the individual who has not been baptized, would you then say that they are at a...I'm not sure how else to word this...a spiritual disadvantage? In other words, without baptism, are they more susceptible to the winds of temptation and sin, less in-tune with the voice of God through the Holy Spirit.

I guess I'm trying to decipher the effects of baptism on the individual. What is the efficacy of baptism? What is its outward appearance? How critical, then, is it for the life of a Christian?

[R. Schutt]

Apparently faith in Jesus Christ automatically guarantees a man, if not sinlessness, at least an absence of guilt for his sins. Such an opinion is not only radically wrong, but also very harmful, because it deprives man of the powerful means of regeneration which our Lord Jesus Christ gave to believers for their spiritual purification and sanctification."

http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/essence_christianity_2.htm

This is very interesting and I notice something in here. As someone having grown up in Evangelical Christianity myself, I'm not even really aware of what it means to have "faith in Jesus Christ." I suppose that most would answer "to have faith in Jesus Christ, you have faith in him dying on the Cross for your sins." But I wonder, is faith enough simply because a historian can have faith that Jesus Christ existed as a historical person.

But I guess there is a difference there: historical person v. Saviour.

What is the Orthodox position on sola fides?

[Herman Blaydoe]

So for the individual who has not been baptized, would you then say that they are at a...I'm not sure how else to word this...a spiritual disadvantage? In other words, without baptism, are they more susceptible to the winds of temptation and sin, less in-tune with the voice of God through the Holy Spirit.

I guess I'm trying to decipher the effects of baptism on the individual. What is the efficacy of baptism? What is its outward appearance? How critical, then, is it for the life of a Christian?

In baptism, according to the Holy Apostle Paul, we die to sin and rise again to live in Christ. Sounds like an efficacious thing to me. It is the "new circumcision" which marks us as members of the People of God. Isn't that a good thing?

More susceptible? I perhaps wouldn't go quite that far, but that person certainly fewer weapons at his disposal to defend himself against sin. That person does not have the advantage of the support the Church, or the healing of the sacraments.

But really what more justification do we need than Christ's own example and command?

[Antonios]

What is the Orthodox position on sola fides?

Dear R. Schutt,

This is straying from the question you raised in the opening post, but should also be answered. As we await for other more knowledgeable members to address this question of yours, here are some verses in Scripture which may shed some light on the Church's position of sola fides:

"and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing" (I Corinthians 13:2)

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21)

"What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? ...as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also" (James 2:14, 26)

In Christ,
Antonios

[Antonios]

TBut I wonder, is faith enough simply because a historian can have faith that Jesus Christ existed as a historical person.

Dear R. Schutt,

Faith has at least two meanings. Faith as in belief and faith as in trust. The agnostic/atheistic historian often has faith in the previous definition (that Jesus was a historical person) but not in the latter (that He is Who He says He is).

In Christ,
Antonios

[Mary]

So for the individual who has not been baptized, would you then say that they are at a...I'm not sure how else to word this...a spiritual disadvantage? In other words, without baptism, are they more susceptible to the winds of temptation and sin, less in-tune with the voice of God through the Holy Spirit.

I guess I'm trying to decipher the effects of baptism on the individual. What is the efficacy of baptism? What is its outward appearance? How critical, then, is it for the life of a Christian?

Dear Ryan,

Welcome to Monachos and to your exploration of Orthodoxy. An awesome journey! =)

As one who has prayed the 'sinner's prayer' countless times and also been baptized as a protestant, and later, got Baptized for real into the Orthodox church - perhaps I can share my experiences. I won't be able to explain why and how. I can only share what I've been through. Others are better equipped to label my experiences.

As a protestant, I never found peace in my heart, regardless of how many times I prayed the 'sinner's prayer'. I was afraid to speak about the lack of peace, because I was told I only needed to pray that prayer once so I thought I must've done something wrong - perhaps I didn't use the right words, perhaps I didn't emphasize the right words, perhaps I have to repeat it three times, or maybe I didn't truly mean what I said and was just pretending. Things didn't change after my protestant baptism. There was no peace in my heart. When there is no peace in your heart, there is no strength in your heart. It is very easy to fall and lose heart. There is nothing to hold on to, nothing to pull you out of the pit you find yourself in. Is there any way of knowing if the words I used were effective? Is there any way of testing my heart for real, and knowing if I truly meant what I said? What assurance is there, that Christ has accepted my prayer? Nothing, except what someone else said. It appeared to me, that everyone else seemed to find this peace except for me. What was I doing wrong? I was too embarrassed to speak to anyone about it. What if I found out that I truly didn't believe in Christ? How could I make myself believe in Him? What is faith? How can I make myself have faith?

I never found my answers. I tried to the best of my ability. Went to every Bible study I could get myself to, every retreat, every single service in church, took notes of every sermon, tried to memorize scripture, tried to read my Bible, I even went to Bible school and tried my hand at becoming a missionary.

Anyway, long story short - I got baptized into the Orthodox Church 3 1/2 years ago. I'm afraid, there aren't accurate enough words to describe my experiences. The peace I sought, I have found. I don't trust any more, in my own ability to believe things. My mind is too small to understand all these things, but my heart knows it's all true. Since my conversion, I have gone through some situations that would've normally destroyed any shred of faith. And yet, in spite of all my doubts and failures, I find myself being strengthened somehow. Where does this strength come from? I know it's not from people. It is a deep strength that has the feel of being constant and endless, and obviously not my own. I know I haven't imagined it or hypnotized myself into feeling it, because it is there, even when I am so devastated that I've decided it's time to give up. There is light, when all I see is darkness.

I've struggled with depression, so it's easy for me to fall into despair. But in just the past 3 years, I've gone from constantly giving up, to knowing how to grab a hold of life and getting up again. Whenever things go wrong, and that happens many times every day, I know what to do. I go to confession, and start over. Gone is my embarrassment of my weaknesses, my inability to be confident all the time about my beliefs, my inability to control my thoughts or my body, all my foolishness, my immaturity and all the things that grow out of my selfishness. I need to confess, and I know my priest won't faint from shock, because he knows that God can heal even me.

It's like I have been given the ability to look beyond this life at something that's greater, and so the struggles of this life become smaller. It's like all the good food that I used to be able to smell, that drove me crazy with hunger - now I can finally eat of it. And boy, do I love to eat!

All this to say - yes, being baptized in the Orthodox church, does have a lot of effect on an individual. My experiences are not unique. Just about everyone else I've spoken to, who has been protestant before and has found the True Church, has pretty much the same experiences. You don't have to have been protestant, you can be Roman Catholic or Hindu, too. They've also found the same thing.

Hope this has been helpful.

In Christ,
Mary.

[J. K. Amra]

What is the Orthodox position on sola fides?


James 2:17-21
Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

It is to my knowledge (which is very little) that the position of the Orthodox Church on anything "sola" is a negative one.

You see, the 5 solas are considered heresy because they are the result of the Protestant Reformation, Sola Scriptura for example, is a result of Satan's greatest lie (aside Islam), the Filioque, which states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son, contradicting John 15:26 which states “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me."

This article continues...


"They "de-Personalized" the Holy Spirit. They began talking about Him, not as a Person, but as a "force" generated between the Father and the Son. As any Roman Catholic nun can explain, the Father loves the Son and the Son loves the Father, and the love they generate between them is the Holy Spirit.

It sounds so nice. It even sounds superficially logical.

Of course it reduces the Trinity to a "Duet."

As noted earlier, the PERSON of the Holy Spirit has been given some work to do - work which cannot be done by an impersonal "force."

This left the Church of Rome with a critical power vacuum. Who would protect the Church and guide her into all truth?

An "infallable" Pope perhaps?

And who would interceed for us, and pray with us, and give utterance to the wordless groanings of our heart? And who would reveal Christ to us?

A perversion of Mary, raised almost to a position of Deity, perhaps?

The growing lack of faith in the Holy Spirit as a Person, capabable of performing His assigned tasks as mentioned in Scripture, led to "replacement strategies" in the Roman Catholic church. These are seen in the escalating claims to power and authority by the Popes of Rome, and by the growing cult of Mary (and the rest of the Saints as well.)

Five hundred years later, Rome's efforts at ruling the Western Christian world gave rise to the Protestant Reformation.

Knowing that Rome was in error, but being largely cut off from contact with the Orthodox communion, the Reformers threw off Rome's yoke, but kept the "Filioque!"

Those Protestant churches which still recite the Nicene Creed still include the Filioque. And even those that do not show a serious lack of faith in the Holy Spirit as a Person (which is evident in their theology and liturgical practice.)

Having deposed the "infallable" Pope, Protestantism has simply refilled his empty throne with an "inerrent" book - the Bible. Rather than a selective canon of inspired writings produced by the Church, the Protestants hold the Scriptures to be an exclusive canon of inspired writings which are the foundation of the Church.

Moreover, by developing the doctrine that each "individual" believer is able to correctly interpret Scripture, Protestantism has in effect made every man his own infallable pope.

Given the above, the multiplicity of Protestant denominations, each claiming Biblical authority, and each preaching a different gospel, is not unexpected.

And that is how the Christian West has made an idol out of the Holy and Inspired Scriptures.

And that is the heresy of which Rome needs to repent."

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Eastern-Orthodox-1456/2009/7/Eastern-Orthodox-Church.htm


Sola is just another word for idolization of Scripture, Faith, Grace, Christ and God.

The Filioque and the Solas are very self-contradicting, using verses out of context, omitting parts from the original transcripts, using the fallacy known as "argument from silence", etc.

[Owen]

The reason the solas are heretical is that they are precisely the antithesis of what it means to be catholic "embracing the whole." They are absolutizations of partial truths.

[Father David Moser]

What is the Orthodox position on sola fides?

Faith without works is dead.

If you love me (Christ) you will keep my commandments.

fr David Moser

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Mr Schutt,

To complement what others have already offered, a thought from a great Father of the Church:

lt behooves those to be baptised [...] so that they are prepared, in the lawful and true and only baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God [...] because it is written 'Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God'. (St Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 72.21)
The injunction to baptise, and to be baptised, is amongst the most fundamental of those offered by the incarnate Lord - who Himself began his 'public ministry' in Judaea through His own baptism. While the Church does not view 'being saved' as a static process, an 'either-or' of yes or no, and does not tend to make pronouncements on hypothetical possibilities (e.g. 'Is it possible for a person in circumstance-x to attain salvation?'), she nonetheless roots her proclamation of the Kingdom come to man in the same manner as her founder and Head, Christ Himself. Baptism is the source of 'divine regeneration', as so many of the Fathers say, in which man's life is united to Christ's and a new birth effected: it is the gateway into the new life of a new Kingdom. It is less important to ask, 'What can or cannot happen without?', than it is to ask, 'What can be gained with?'

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Sean M.]

What is the Orthodox view on baptism by desire and baptism of blood?

[Herman Blaydoe]

What is the Orthodox view on baptism by desire and baptism of blood?

We recognize it. God is not limited by our rites, but He gave us the rites that we may go beyond our own limitations.

Herman the Pooh